Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 65
  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    19,689
    President Trump did not say the Democrat memo will not be released.


    the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    83,786
    Quote Originally Posted by ciaban View Post
    It's not circumstantial evidence is the circumstances around a proven fact, or "is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact" since we haven't PROVEN that Trump colluded with Russia, this can't be circumstantial evidence.
    Did Russia interfere in our election? Yes.
    Did Flynn talk to the Russians about loosening existing sanctions? Yes.
    Did he impose additional sanctions on Russia, as the law requires? No.

    This is how circumstantial evidence works. I don't have a smoking gun that says that Trump hammered out a deal for Putin to interfere. I concede that and highly doubt such a deal or meeting exists. But the evidence suggests that people in his orbit absolutely attempted something like this.
    Think long and hard about why you respond to nonsense. Please!

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    3,196
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Did Russia interfere in our election? Yes.
    Did Flynn talk to the Russians about loosening existing sanctions? Yes.
    Did he impose additional sanctions on Russia, as the law requires? No.

    This is how circumstantial evidence works. I don't have a smoking gun that says that Trump hammered out a deal for Putin to interfere. I concede that and highly doubt such a deal or meeting exists. But the evidence suggests that people in his orbit absolutely attempted something like this.
    Did they meet with Russians about sanctions prior to the election, lie about it on multiple occasions, and have the president dictate a response about a meeting he wasnít in?
    Did the party platform towards Russia change after multiple members of the trump campaign met with Russians at the convention?

    This is a fun game though isnít it. Remove any grain of truth or reason to any situation and scream canned talking points. This is more parlor game than conversation.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    President Trump did not say the Democrat memo will not be released.

    Funny that you weren't so gung-ho about a certain other memo being declared inaccurate and needing work.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    19,689
    Quote Originally Posted by browski234 View Post
    Funny that you weren't so gung-ho about a certain other memo being declared inaccurate and needing work.
    the other memo did have corrections made. Democrats tried to say that was malicious too.
    Democrats also whined on their Liberal media about how the Nunes memo was going to expose sources and methods and was dangerous for America, and that was a lie. yet you people still believe whatever the Democrats say.

    the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    83,786
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    the other memo did have corrections made. Democrats tried to say that was malicious too.
    Democrats also whined on their Liberal media about how the Nunes memo was going to expose sources and methods and was dangerous for America, and that was a lie. yet you people still believe whatever the Democrats say.
    No. The GOP memo didn't contain any useful information and this could be released without redacting.
    Think long and hard about why you respond to nonsense. Please!

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    83,786
    Is it true that none of the top intelligence officials from DNI, CIA, FBI, etc. all day the president hasnít asked them about Russiaís involvement in 2018 and 2020?

    I havenít seen the video so I donít want to declare it as fact and hope that I have been misinformed. Please someone tell me thatís not true.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    24,599
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    the other memo did have corrections made. Democrats tried to say that was malicious too. Democrats also whined on their Liberal media about how the Nunes memo was going to expose sources and methods and was dangerous for America, and that was a lie. yet you people still believe whatever the Democrats say.
    So how do you know the corrections the other memo had made were to take out the sources and methods that were dangerous for America?

  9. #39
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    19,689
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    So how do you know the corrections the other memo had made were to take out the sources and methods that were dangerous for America?
    there were no sources and methods in the Nunes memo. many Republicans had read it and would have known.

    the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    san josYAY
    Posts
    20,260
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Once the election was over, Russia would have already provided the quid (hacking emails from DNC and Podesta. The quo would need to be then provided by Trump (loosening of existing sanctions for Crimea invasion and not adding new sanctions for 2016 election tampering).
    So then they made the deal AFTER they meddled in the election? So after it was over they came and say hey we helped you out without your knowledge or permission now help us out?
    The only way that makes sense is if they made a quid quo pro deal BEFORE the election, which hasn't been proven AT ALL.
    The best we have is that Trump Jr met with some Russian Lawyer for 10 min, they didn't exchange any info or talk about anything substantive and then they parted ways.
    So no, unless there is evidence to show that he had a deal with Russia before to get help in the election.
    Him not following through on it isn't evidence of anything.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    san josYAY
    Posts
    20,260
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Did Russia interfere in our election? Yes.
    Did Flynn talk to the Russians about loosening existing sanctions? Yes.
    Did he impose additional sanctions on Russia, as the law requires? No.

    This is how circumstantial evidence works. I don't have a smoking gun that says that Trump hammered out a deal for Putin to interfere. I concede that and highly doubt such a deal or meeting exists. But the evidence suggests that people in his orbit absolutely attempted something like this.
    How did the Russians interfere in our elections? By spending 500k on Facebook ads? Some of which were pro trump/hillary/blm/cops/guns/abortions some of which were Anti all those things. What substantial impact did the Russians actually have.

    When did Flynn talk to the Russians? Was it before the election, in some sort of coordination, or after, during Transition? Because if it happened after the fact, them not issuing the sanctions doesn't mean anything.
    Maybe they just don't want to piss off a nuclear power over facebook ads.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    24,599
    Quote Originally Posted by ciaban View Post
    How did the Russians interfere in our elections? By spending 500k on Facebook ads? Some of which were pro trump/hillary/blm/cops/guns/abortions some of which were Anti all those things. What substantial impact did the Russians actually have.

    When did Flynn talk to the Russians? Was it before the election, in some sort of coordination, or after, during Transition? Because if it happened after the fact, them not issuing the sanctions doesn't mean anything.
    Maybe they just don't want to piss off a nuclear power over facebook ads.
    Is this some sort of joke? How can anyone still try to deny that Russia influenced our elections?

    1. Russia hacked the DNC and released the emails to WikiLeaks

    2. Russia hacked 20 States' election systems

    3. That small amount they spent on Facebook ads reached a lot of people, 126 million to be exact.

    4. In addition to Facebook, they also had over 50,000 bots on twitter that also reached a sizeable audience.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-had-disclosed

    And none of that is even getting into the multitude of times Russian officials met with various Trump associates during the campaign.


    There is simply no way you can try to argue Russia did not influence our elections in a substantial way. It cannot be done while existing in reality.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    san josYAY
    Posts
    20,260
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    No. The GOP memo didn't contain any useful information and this could be released without redacting.
    Then why did the democrats keep saying it had info that was dangerous to America's safety and that Americans weren't capable of understanding the nuances. It can't be both nothing, AND to dangerous and irresponsible to release.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    83,786
    Quote Originally Posted by ciaban View Post
    So then they made the deal AFTER they meddled in the election? So after it was over they came and say hey we helped you out without your knowledge or permission now help us out?
    The only way that makes sense is if they made a quid quo pro deal BEFORE the election, which hasn't been proven AT ALL.
    The best we have is that Trump Jr met with some Russian Lawyer for 10 min, they didn't exchange any info or talk about anything substantive and then they parted ways.
    So no, unless there is evidence to show that he had a deal with Russia before to get help in the election.
    Him not following through on it isn't evidence of anything.
    We donít know the full timeline. But thereís nothing to indicate the deal was made after the interference. And I think youíre conflating two different sanction removals. The one that would have to have been discussed before hand, probably about the time Manafort came onto the campaign (but thatís my own speculation) would be for the sanctions relief for Crimea. Then there would be an underlying assumption that Trump wouldnít impose sanctions for anything related to the election meddling.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    san josYAY
    Posts
    20,260
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Is this some sort of joke? How can anyone still try to deny that Russia influenced our elections?

    1. Russia hacked the DNC and released the emails to WikiLeaks

    2. Russia hacked 20 States' election systems

    3. That small amount they spent on Facebook ads reached a lot of people, 126 million to be exact.

    4. In addition to Facebook, they also had over 50,000 bots on twitter that also reached a sizeable audience.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-had-disclosed

    And none of that is even getting into the multitude of times Russian officials met with various Trump associates during the campaign.


    There is simply no way you can try to argue Russia did not influence our elections in a substantial way. It cannot be done while existing in reality.
    1.Where is the evidence of that? You need to provide evidence.
    Multiple independent groups have verified that the size of the leak was to big to have been online through hacking. And that it was most likely done internally by someone who worked at the DNC (likely Seth rich, but we don't know for sure.) Wikileaks is an independent media outlet with no ties to Russia.

    2.They attempted to hack but they didn't accomplish anything.
    http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...g-and-the-2016
    In the majority of the states, the Department of Homeland Security only saw preparations for hacking, like scanning to find potential modes for attack.
    3. What impact did those ad's have, and once again they weren't all pro trump add's many were anti-trump, and pro-hillary, and most weren't even related to the election but social issues like BLM and Gun Control.
    Hillary spent over a billion dollars on this election. A BILLION, are you really trying to tell me that the 500k they spent on Facebook ad's had ANYWHERE near the impact that Hillary's billion had.
    4.What tangible impact did those twitter bots actually have?

    Did Russia make attempts to influence our election, sure, but did they? What tangible, measurable effect did they actually have on the election.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •